Texas GOP rejects ‘critical thinking’ skills. Really.

[Denver]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Explain away this part, please:Please tell me hypothetically how that can be misinterpreted.

Hypothetically is indeed the best I can do. As I said above, I can accept it as phrase that they have placed in a bucket with other things like non-Christian beliefs, anti-American, terrorism, challenging the student’s fixed beliefs (which they equate to indoctrination) and undermining parental authority (which they equate to denial of god-given, god-promised rights).

If, hypothetically, these are equated in the minds of the authors, then it could be the same to them as saying: have the purpose of indoctrinating students to deny and even outlaw their right to their own faith and religion.

I certainly do not read it that way, and I gather neither do you. But if people in that culture DO (hypothetically), then I can understand why they would want to adopt a platform that prevents it.

[Denver]

The other item that makes me want to give them the benefit of a doubt is:

Quote:

Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.

It doesn't have to be read that ALL critical thinking skills must be anathema, but those that focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority. Which as I said, could be read, by culture, as anti-religious or anti-american indoctination under the guise of 'cricital thinking skills'.

In the end, I think it is implausible that people who love their kids and want them to have a good life, would say they do not want to teach them to think well. Rather, they don't want them to be specifically taught that their religion is bad, which they probably do not see as the pervue of a public school.

[mhaze]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Denial means you are denying this part is in the platform:Please tell me hypothetically how that can be misinterpreted.

Right. You ARE making things up. I haven't denied anything, I've just said I don't know what it means in any practical sense. And I've suggested to you the simple, direct method to find accurately, the facts - ask the committee that drafted it.

But if you know it all, never mind. I just don't, and I've lived down here most of my life. Pretty sure that there is a story behind it, though. You don't think it could result from incidences of students being forced into sex ed classrooms where they had to practice proper use of condoms by putting them on bananas, do you? Naw....there'd be no progressive liberal thing going on that might royally piss off the parents.

Naw....

No way...

Wait....

[Skeptic Ginger]

2 + 2 = 4

How can you be sure that's what they meant?

What is the point of even having a political platform if the meaning of said platform is so nebulous?

[mhaze]

Go ahead, ignore my comments and make up more stuff. A better analogy would be

HOTS + OBE = ???

Where Wikipedia shows over a dozen varieties of OBE, and you don't know (and don't care) which is referenced. Therefore the actual issues at hand are not cited, and nothing meaningful can be derived from such a discussion. However, it has propaganda value and this is all you are doing - "propagating the meme", that the Texas GOP, and by extension, the GOP in general, is backwards. A simple Google check shows clearly the starburst media pattern by which this promulgation occurred. Go ahead, trace the timelines back in a search engine and see who it is that's running you, the puppet.

However, leaving that aside, you make a smear regarding a large thing (political platform) by taking a tiny part of it (admitted to be in error in part) and placing the "nebulous" of the small part on the whole. A nice rhetorical technique. But I've correctly answered you - twice, so this will be my final comment and you can go back to repeating the lies.

Ask the committee chair for a clarification on the comment.

[Skeptic Ginger]

You are in denial/apology mode, MHaze and it is clouding your political judgement as usual.

What is the point of even having a political platform if the meaning of said platform is so nebulous?

And what is unclear about "have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority"? You are welcome to use the context you think I've left out to explain the meaning of this.

[mhaze]

To ignore you go, which is quite an accomplishment, but well deserved.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yeah, because my questions were so unreasonable.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by happyskeptic

Republican Party of Texas (RPT) Communications Director Chris Elam said the “critical thinking skills” language made it into the platform by mistake.

I have not posted enought in the forum to place the link but if you search the keywords Texas GOP Critical Thinking mistake you will find a few articles.

Well, funny you should mention that Chris, because it's my fixed belief that you are a liar and you were not born but rather squeezed out of scrotal acne. Who are you to challenge my fixed beliefs?

I can tell you what is not a belief, but undeniable fact, and that's that the language in question was written by some mouth-breathing mutant in your party for it to get to your platform in the first place.

[mikeyx]

Originally Posted by Polaris

Well, funny you should mention that Chris, because it's my fixed belief that you are a liar and you were not born but rather squeezed out of scrotal acne. Who are you to challenge my fixed beliefs?

I can tell you what is not a belief, but undeniable fact, and that's that the language in question was written by some mouth-breathing mutant in your party for it to get to your platform in the first place.

texas sucks